The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1887-12-10

tl0n UneYeOf snail De nangeu ny tne
neck until dead" it does so, not be-
cause the taking Of human life Is n
sin, bat for the protection Of So
ciety.
Doctrines of public policy must
necessarily lie of q most elastic
character. In carrying out such
doctrines we have to take into con-
sideration what may best subserve
the interests Of the State, what
may be essential for the preserva-
tion of the welfare of the commu-
nifty, and what may most readily
develop its industrial resources
In seeking to accomplish these ends
warrants have been found for the
establishment of common schools,
for the imposition of taxes, for the
regulation of the sale of dangerous
articles, and for the doing of many
other things which protect both the
State and the individual from va
rious dangers. On no other ground
has the State ever interfered eth
er with the suppression or the reg
ulation of the liquor traffic, and on
no other ground could it rightly
do so, and the great mistake made
by all who insist that men shall be
put under the rule of a prohibitory
law is in assuming that, like God,
the State abhors crime for the
righteousness sake. Zealots of this
ilk do not seem to understand the
distinction that exists between a
civil statute and u precept of
morals.
1t may be taken for granted, if
only for the sake of argument, that
open immortality is of itself subver-
sive of the public good, and that as
society progresses our legislative
economy must in its administration
demand that moral motives be con-
sidered as an important factor
But in their purblindness some of
our moral reformers move only in
a circle; and they single out for
Legislative condemnation the par
ticular sin or fault which in their
view is initiating against social
progress. Use all men according
to their deserts and who would es-
cape whipping? Anthony Com
stock has started crusade against
art which, if it should be carried
out on his lines to its logical con-
clusion, would close every picture
gallery and museum and every art
school and private studio in the
country. Because some harm may
be done by the exhibition of i'm
modest pictures, therefore the many
who delight in art for arts sake
are to be deprived of an opportuni-
ty of studying the works of paint
ers and sculptors! To that condi-
tion, at least, would the squeamish
Comstock reduce us. Again, be-
cause there are many people who
abuse liquor and thus create bur-
dens of taxation for the support of
asylums, prisons and reformatories,
the admitted majority who never
get drunk and who never inflict
damage on society are to he de-
prived of creature comforts and
many of the social enjoyments of
life! Such deprivation, at least,
would the Prohibition zealots con-
trive.
The burden of proofs always on
the prosecution. The Prohibition
ist must show that the evil of which
he complains is so great that it out
weighs all the claims of those who
are opposed to him. He must
demonstrate that, because portion
of society is vicious in it's abuse of
liquor, it is necessary to forbid its
use by the remaining portion, which
is far greater. The abstract ques-
tion of sinfulness is not on the rec
ord; neither is the question of eX-
pediency of abolishing the traffic.
Nor can he argue that abstinence
should be practiced, perforce OF
law, in order to set an example to
the weak or vicious.
TO SO abstain may be commend
able in the individual, but his esti-
mate of moral duty cannot he en-
acted into civil law to force
another man to adopt his peculiar
ideas.
The moral convictions, or the
notions of expediency of one man
, NAV oariSo him tO ana0t for him,